In light of Prop 37 hype on Google+, I was wondering what do you guys think of GMO? And by 'what do you think' I mean what is the objective, scientific, assessment of GMO? I don't know much about it myself, so I would like those of you who know something more to share links, facts, studies, etc. and after that (and only after that) your personal opinions on GMO.

Cons of GMOs:
Alteration of biodiversity (pest-resistant crops either lead to decrease in numbers of a particular insect, or natural selection might lead to a population of pests immune to the effects of the crop) (Pest-resistant crops may transfer pest-resistant genes to nearly related weeds, creating pest-resistant weeds), possible side effects from various foreign proteins in crops (allergic reactions and such).

Personal opinions on GMO?
It's a double-edged sword, but pros outweigh the cons in my opinion. Only problem I have is companies who try to exploit such technology for their own gains.

Welcome to science. You're gonna like it here - Phil Plait

Have you ever tried taking a comfort blanket away from a small child? - DLJ

GMOs suck in a diverse planting situation. They tend to be really shitty at being a part of a balanced system. For mono cropping they are much better.

My biggest problem with GMOs is when companies patent the plant. When the seeds naturally spread, these big companies sue farmers who have their patented plant interbreeding with a similar, non GMO crop. Example: farmer joe grows soybeans. Farmer frank grows GMO soybeans. Franks beans pollinate joes beans, so when joe harvests and save his seed, it is now a hybrid with the GMO from franks crop. Joe can't stop this from happening, and the company with the patent swoops in and forces joe to buy their GMO beans or get sued for stealing their patent.

Science is awesome, and GMO can definitely help the world, but the abuse of science makes me ill.

(08-11-2012 02:10 PM)Stark Raving Wrote: My biggest problem with GMOs is when companies patent the plant. When the seeds naturally spread, these big companies sue farmers who have their patented plant interbreeding with a similar, non GMO crop. Example: farmer joe grows soybeans. Farmer frank grows GMO soybeans. Franks beans pollinate joes beans, so when joe harvests and save his seed, it is now a hybrid with the GMO from franks crop. Joe can't stop this from happening, and the company with the patent swoops in and forces joe to buy their GMO beans or get sued for stealing their patent.

This isn't an issue with GMOs. This is an issue with the patenting office and copyright laws. If a pharmacy patented the cure for cancer, would your gripe be with the cure or the patenting methods?

(08-11-2012 02:10 PM)Stark Raving Wrote: My biggest problem with GMOs is when companies patent the plant. When the seeds naturally spread, these big companies sue farmers who have their patented plant interbreeding with a similar, non GMO crop. Example: farmer joe grows soybeans. Farmer frank grows GMO soybeans. Franks beans pollinate joes beans, so when joe harvests and save his seed, it is now a hybrid with the GMO from franks crop. Joe can't stop this from happening, and the company with the patent swoops in and forces joe to buy their GMO beans or get sued for stealing their patent.

This isn't an issue with GMOs. This is an issue with the patenting office and copyright laws. If a pharmacy patented the cure for cancer, would your gripe be with the cure or the patenting methods?

Cool your jets there turbo. I think I was pretty clear that I had a problem with what companies do with GMOs. Just because it's not an issue with the actual science doesn't make it irrelevant.

(08-11-2012 02:18 PM)Logica Humano Wrote: This isn't an issue with GMOs. This is an issue with the patenting office and copyright laws. If a pharmacy patented the cure for cancer, would your gripe be with the cure or the patenting methods?

Cool your jets there turbo. I think I was pretty clear that I had a problem with what companies do with GMOs. Just because it's not an issue with the actual science doesn't make it irrelevant.

Where did I say your points were irrelevant? I said your gripes are not with GMOs, they are with patenting protocols.